UNIVERSITY    OF    CALIFORNIA     AGRICULTURAL    EXPERIMENT   STATION 
COLLEGE   OF  AGRICULTURE  BENJ-  '°E  WHEELER-  -"'«" 

THOMAS    FORSYTH    HUNT,    Dean  and  Director 

BERKELEY  H.    E.   VAN    NORMAN.    Vice-Director    and    Dean 

University  Farm  School 


CIRCULAR  No.  169 
September,  1917 

THE  1918  GRAIN  CROP 

By  THOMAS  FORSYTH  HUNT 


This  circular  has  been  prepared  not  to  explain  how  a  farmer  can 
make  the  greatest  profit  during  the  present  crisis,  but  to  discuss 
how  maximum  production  may  be  obtained  without  loss  of  the  usual 
income. 

One  of  the  requirements  for  increasing  the  production  of  food  is 
capital.  The  most  effective  capital  is  the  profit  which  farmers  have 
obtained  from  a  previous  crop.  Whenever  a  farmer  finds  himself 
with  a  surplus  of  $500  or  $5000,  his  almost  invariable  procedure  is 
to  reinvest  that  money  in  increasing  his  business,  in  improving  his 
property,  or  in  furnishing  his  home.  Under  existing  conditions  he 
may  as  a  patriotic  citizen  be  depended  upon  to  extend  his  business. 

An  investigation  has  shown  that  canals  and  principal  laterals  are 
already  constructed  to  irrigate  a  half-million  more  acres  of  land  in 
California  than  are  being  irrigated  in  1917.  This  land  cannot  be 
brought  under  cultivation  without  an  investment  of  capital.  The 
most  effective  capital  for  bringing  much  of  this  area  under  irrigation 
is  the  profit  which  the  farmer  will  obtain  from  the  1917  crop.  He 
understands  better  than  anyone  else  how  to  use  this  capital.  Unless 
the  capital  in  the  hands  of  the  farmer  increases  he  is  not  apt  to 
increase  production  to  any  great  degree,  not  because  he  does  not  want 
to  do  so  but  because  he  can  not.  The  general  desire  of  the  farmer 
is  to  extend  his  operations,  even  in  times  of  peace,  but  when  prices 
are  low  and  when  perhaps  he  must  mortgage  the  farm  to  pay  his 
taxes  he  finds  it  impossible  to  do  so.  Probably  the  California  farmer 
will  receive  more  for  his  1917  crop  than  he  has  received  for  any 
previous  crop.  Hence  a  considerable  increase  in  the  1918  crop  may 
be  confidently  expected. 

What  should  be  the  price  of  any  commodity?  Obviously,  it 
should  be  sufficient  to  cause  its  production.  Just  at  present  wheat 
should  bring  such  a  price  as  to  cause  its  maximum  production.      Can 


this  price  be  determined?  The  United  States  is  a  large  and  varied 
country.  Hence  there  is  danger  in  trying  to  make  statements  of 
general  application.  It  is  possible,  however,  to  give  concrete  examples 
that  may  have  local  application.  Under  average  soil  and  climatic 
conditions  forty  bushels  or  twenty  centals  of  barley  is  considered  a 
satisfactory  yield  in  California.  An  equally  satisfactory  yield  of 
wheat  is  twenty  bushels  or  twelve  centals  per  acre.  The  cost  of 
producing  either  crop  being  substantially  equal,  in  order  to  secure 
the  sowing  of  wheat  in  place  of  barley  the  gross  return  from  an 
acre  of  wheat  should  be  at  least  equal  to  that  from  an  acre  of  barley. 
If  barley  is  worth  $2  per  cental  or  $1  per  bushel,  it  would  be  necessary 
that  wheat  should  bring  $3.33  per  cental  or  $2  per  bushel.  Last 
winter  when  barley  was  selling  at  $60  per  ton  wheat  was  not  too  high 
at  $5  per  cental  or  $3  per  bushel  from  the  standpoint  of  inducing 
future  production. 

These  comparisons  have  application  only  in  those  sections  of  the 
state  where  soil  and  climatic  conditions  are  such  as  to  make  these  two 
crops  practically  interchangeable.  There  are  some,  perhaps  consid- 
erable, portions  of  the  state  where  barley  is  a  safer  risk  through  a 
series  of  years.  Under  such  circumstances  the  relative  price  of  wheat 
must  be  increased  to  make  it  an  economically  desirable  crop.  In 
other  portions  of  the  state  where  the  relative  yield  of  wheat  is  greater, 
a  smaller  price  should  be  necessary  to  promote  its  production. 

As  an  illustration,  at  the  University  Farm  at  Davis,  under  the  biennial  dry- 
farming  system  the  average  yield  of  seven  crops  of  "White  Australian  (Oregon 
Blue-stem)  wheat,  1908-14  inclusive,  was  43.53  bushels  or  26.11  centals  per  acre, 
while  the  corresponding  average  for  Common  California  (Bay  Brewing,  or  Coast) 
barley  under  like  conditions  was  83.46  bushels  or  41.73  centals.  Under  these 
conditions  when  barley  is  worth  $1  per  bushel  or  $2  per  cental,  it  would  be  neces- 
sary for  wheat  to  bring  $1.92  per  bushel  or  $3.20  per  cental  to  make  the  same 
gross  return  per  acre.  A  further  example  may  be  found  in  the  average  yield  of 
wheat  in  California  for  the  decade  ending  1915,  which  was  16.01  bushels  or  9.61 
centals  per  acre,  while  the  average  yield  of  barley  for  the  same  period  was 
28  bushels  or  14  centals  per  acre.  With  barley  at  $2  per  hundred  pounds  wheat 
should  be  worth  $2.92  per  cental  or  $1.75  per  bushel. 

Obviously,  as  the  price  of  barley  falls,  a  lower  price  for  wheat  will 
be  sufficient  to  cause  it  to  be  planted.  "What  then  are  the  factors 
which  influence  the  price  of  barley?  Discussion  is  here  limited  to 
the  standpoint  of  its  value  as  a  food  for  domestic  animals. 

There  are  three  crops  in  the  United  States  that  are  more  or  less 
interchangeable.  The  average  annual  production  in  the  United  States 
for  the  decade  ending  December,  1916  has  been  as  follows : 


Bushels 

Indian   Corn   2,705,348,000 

Oats    1,115,956,800 

Barley    ....! 183,451,300 

The  average  December  farm  price  of  these  three  crops  for  the  same 
decade  has  been : 

Bushels  Centals 

Indian    Corn $  .609  $1.09 

Oats  415  1.30 

Barley  619  1.24 

It  is  wholly  possible,  and  indeed  quite  probable,  that  the  United 
States  will  produce  this  year  the  largest  crop  of  Indian  corn  in  its 
history.  The  yields  of  oats  and  barley  may  be  above  normal.  Since 
it  is  the  net  deficit  or  the  net  surplus  that  causes  the  great  fluctuations 
in  prices,  the  question  arises  as  to  whether  a  considerable  decrease  in 
price  may  not  be  anticipated  when  these  three  great  crops,  or  at  least 
the  greatest  of  the  three,  Indan  corn,  begins  to  find  its  way  to  market. 

Without  passing  any  opinion  upon  the  future  prices  of  these 
products  a  number  of  factors  involved  may  be  stated.  Their  aggre- 
gate exportation  is  fairly  considerable,  but  it  constitutes  a  relatively 
small  portion  of  the  total.  The  prices  are  therefore  largely  a  domes- 
tic matter.  Chicago,  and  not  Liverpool,  controls  the  price  of  these 
commodities.1 

In  passing  it  may  be  stated  that  this  is  a  factor  in  their  favor, 
since  they  will  not  be  as  violently  affected  by  foreign  conditions,  nor 
as  likely  to  be  influenced  by  governmental  regulations. 

It  requires  about  500  pounds  of  Indian  corn  or  an  equal  amount 
of  barley  meal  to  produce  100  pounds  of  growth  in  hogs.  Hence, 
when  hogs  are  worth  five  cents  a  pound,  either  food  will  return  one 
cent  a  pound  when  fed  to  them ;  if  hogs  are  worth  ten  cents,  two  cents 
will  be  returned  per  pound  of  food ;  and  if  fifteen  cents,  as  at  present, 
three  cents  will  be  returned  per  pound.  Under  the  conditions  named, 
a  farmer  would  not  be  justified  in  buying  barley  meal  at  three  cents 
a  pound  or  $60  a  ton  to  feed  to  hogs  because  he  is  entitled  to  some 
return  for  the  capital  invested,  and  for  the  labor  and  the  risks  in- 
curred from  cholera  and  other  causes,  unless  it  is  thereby  possible  to 
make  use  also  of  cheaper  foods  such  as  alfalfa  pasture.  It  is  evident, 
however,  that  as  long  as  hogs  are  fifteen  cents  a  pound  or  higher,  corn 
and  barley  must  have  some  rather  definite  relation  to  that  fact. 

1  This  statement  is  wholly  unscientific,  but  represents  the  popular  conception. 
It  is  perhaps  more  accurate  to  say  that  Chicago,  and  not  Liverpool,  offers  the  best 
evidence  of  the  demand. 


The  factors  affecting  the  price  of  pork  are  important  therefore  in 
determining  the  price  of  Indian  corn  and  of  barley  and  hence  the 
acreage  of  the  1918  crop  of  wheat.2 

Aside  from  the  general  rise  in  prices  due  to  the  increase  per  capita 
of  money  and  instruments  of  credit,  the  chief  factors  in  the  increased 
price  of  pork  are  due  to : 

1.  Augmented  foreign  demands  for  pork  products,  including 

lard. 

2.  Increased  cost  of  production. 

The  increased  cost  of  production  is  due  partly  to  the  increased  price 
of  Indian  corn  and  barley.  The  increased  price  of  Indian  corn  and 
barley  is  due  in  part  to  the  increased  value  of  pork.  Each  reacts 
on  the  other.  W*ith  Indian  corn  at  $1.68  per  bushel  the  food  cost 
of  producing  100  pounds  of  increase  in  weight  is  $15  on  the  basis 
heretofore  explained. 

During  normal  times  an  abundant  crop  of  Indian  corn  is  followed 
by  an  increased  production  of  pork,  culminating  in  the  following 
August  and  September  when  the  spring  crop  of  pigs  begin  to  mature. 
This  seesaw  between  the  price  of  Indian  corn  and  the  price  of  pork 
has  been  going  on  for  several  generations  and  is  perfectly  well  under- 
stood. Other  factors,  however,  due  to  the  unprecedented  war  de- 
mands, will  doubtless  bring  about  a  disturbing  element.  What  the 
net  result  will  be  no  one  can,  of  course,  accurately  foresee.  It  is, 
nevertheless,  interesting  to  observe  that  there  is  a  very  direct  relation 
between  the  demand  for  " khaki"  and  the  price  of  wheat.  The 
greatly  enhanced  price  of  wool  will  tend  to  hold  back  the  marketing 
of  mutton.  This  will  cause  an  increased  demand  for  other  meats, 
thus  holding  up  the  price  of  Indian  corn,  oats,  and  barley,  and  hence 
tend  to  reduce  the  production  of  wheat.  An  increase  in  the  price  of 
wool  tends  to  increase  the  price  of  mutton.  The  price  of  mutton 
tends  to  maintain  the  price  of  beef  and  pork.  The  price  of  beef  and 
pork  tends  to  maintain  the  price  of  corn  and  barley.  The  price  of 
corn  and  barley  tends  to  increase  their  acreage.  Increased  acreage 
in  corn  and  barley  tends  to  decrease  the  acreage  in  wheat.  Any  man 
who  buys  an  extra  suit  of  clothes  inevitably  tends  to  decrease  the 
future  supply  of  wheat  for  ourselves  and  our  allies. 

Taking  the  country  as  a  whole,  other  grains  can  be  substituted 
for  barley  as  food  for  domestic  animals.      As  food  for  our  allies  in 


2  For  simplicity  of  statement,  hogs  are  used  in  this  discussion,  although  the 
same  principles  apply  more  or  less  fully  to  all  other  domestic  animals,  and  par- 
ticularly to  such  animal  products  as  butter  and  eggs. 


practice  nothing  can  take  the  place  of  wheat.  It  is  of  the  utmost 
importance  that  all  reasonable  effort  be  made  to  increase  its  pro- 
duction. 

If  every  farmer  puts  wheat  on  10  per  cent  of  the  acreage  which  he 
usually  sows  to  barley,  he  will  increase  the  acreage  of  wheat  in  Cali- 
fornia by  33  per  cent.  Some  lands  are  now  sown  to  barley  because 
the  lack  of  water  or  plant  food,  or  both,  make  it  difficult  to  raise 
wheat.  Without  doubt,  it  is  better  to  continue  chiefly  to  raise  barley 
under  such  conditions.  However,  if  the  methods  briefly  outlined  in 
this  circular  and  more  fully  discussed  in  circulars  on  wheat  by  Gil- 
more  and  on  fertilizers  by  Lipman  are  followed,  most  farmers  who 
raise  barley  will  be  justified  in  putting  10  per  cent  of  their  grain 
acreage  into  wheat. 

Even  if  the  result  is  not  wholly  satisfactory  the  loss  can  not  be 
great.  A  plentiful  supply  of  wheat  for  our  allies  next  year  may  be 
the  decisive  factor  of  this  war.  Every  barley  farmer  can  afford  to 
take  the  slight  risk  involved. 

The  production  of  wheat  may  be  increased  in  other  ways  than  by 
the  substitution  of  this  crop  for  barley  or  other  cereals.  There  are 
at  least  two  ways  open  in  California. 

1.  Use  of  new  land  not  recently  used  for  other  purposes  than 
grazing.  On  these  new  areas  wheat  may  be  raised  by  dry-land  farm- 
ing or  where  water  is  available  irrigation  may  be  used.  Wheat  has 
not  been  irrigated  extensively  in  California  because  normally  other 
crops,  such  as  fruits,  alfalfa,  and  sugar  beets,  have  been  more  profit- 
able under  similar  conditions. 

Under  present  conditions  wheat  will  bring  a  satisfactory  gross 
return  at  a  considerably  smaller  expense  for  labor  than  that  used 
on  many  other  crops.  The  only  possible  loss  where  conditions  are 
favorable  would  be  a  possible  lessening  of  the  value  of  the  capital 
invested.  Wherever  practicable,  therefore,  farmers  should  take  up 
the  growing  of  wheat  under  irrigation.  Any  poor  stands  of  alfalfa 
may  well  be  plowed  up  and  put  into  wheat,  not  only  from  the  stand- 
point of  immediate  return,  but  because  of  the  improvement  of  these 
tracts  for  future  seeding  of  alfalfa  or  other  crops.  In  sections  where 
the  water  table  has  risen  it  will  be  especially  desirable,  since  wheat 
can  be  raised  with  less  water  than  alfalfa.  Wheat  requires  its  water 
when  the  latter  is  not  abundantly  needed  for  other  crops.  Irrigation 
of  wheat  will  thus  increase  the  duty  of  water. 

In  certain  sections  the  growing  of  wheat,  barlej^,  and  oats  has 
so  far  disappeared  for  any  purpose  other  than  grain  hay  that  suitable 


grain  harvesting  machinery  no  longer  exists.  In  such  cases  com- 
munity action  is  desirable. 

The  College  of  Agriculture  of  the  University  of  California  urges 
the  farmers  of  the  state  to  increase  the  wheat  acreage  under  irrigation. 
In  order  to  encourage  the  movement,  it  will  send  free  of  charge  irri- 
gation advisers  into  any  community  to  give  information  concerning 
the  most  suitable  methods  where  farmers,  through  lack  of  experience, 
feel  the  need  of  such  information. 

It  has  been  found,  after  investigation,  that  under  a  number  of 
irrigation  systems  in  California  there  are  considerable  areas  not  now 
irrigated  for  one  cause  or  another,  which  will  be  available  for  the 
application  of  water  under  reasonable  terms.  A  portion  of  these 
areas  will  be  adapted  to  grain  production.  It  is  possible  to  raise 
emergency  crops  on  some  of  these  lands  without  the  usual  expensive 
methods  of  levelling  and  checking.  Practical  advice  will  be  offered 
on  application  at  any  time.  Information  concerning  the  location, 
ownership,  and  adaptability  of  the  larger  of  these  areas  will  also  be 
given  so  far  as  it  is  available.  The  responsibility  for  all  financial 
arrangements  will  rest  entirely  with  the  owners  of  the  land  or  their 
agents  and  the  parties  interested. 

It  is  believed  that  there  are  considerable  areas  of  land  which  once 
raised  grain  but  which  have  recently  been  used  for  grazing  owing 
largely  to  economic  conditions  of  the  past,  but  upon  which,  at  present 
prices,  wheat  would  at  least  pay  the  cost  of  production.  Unfortun- 
ately, on  lands  where  the  rainfall  is  less  than  fifteen  inches  satisfactory 
crops  are  not  generally  assured  unless  biennial  cropping  is  practiced. 
Hence  these  lands  cannot  be  used  to  the  best  advantage  for  the  1918 
crop  unless  they  were  plowed  in  the  fall  of  1916  or  the  winter  and 
spring  of  1917.  It  is  now  not  too  early  to  begin  to  consider  the  1919 
crop  on  these  lands. 

2.  There  remains  another  method  of  increasing  the  production  of 
wheat.  It  is  the  increase  in  the  yield  on  existing  acreage.  It  is  per- 
haps the  most  effective  method.  There  are  four  simple  and  relatively 
easily  applied  means  of  increasing  the  yield  of  wheat  or  barley  per 
acre. 

(a)  Better  seed,  including  treatment  against  preventable  diseases. 

( b )  More  thorough  preparation  of  soil. 

(c)  Greater  care  in  seeding  promptly  when  the  proper  time  ar- 

rives.    (Great  losses  unquestionably  occur  through  delayed 
seeding. ) 

(d)  The  application  of  fertilizers. 

In  the  circular  on  wheat  culture  Gilmore  gives  a  considerable 
amount  of  experimental  data  covering  these  factors.  Emphasis  is 
here  placed  upon  the  economical  aspects  of  the  use  of  chemical 
manures.  California  was  once  a  great  wheat  state.  Largely  for 
economic  reasons  wheat  raising  has  declined.  There  is  nothing  in 
the  soil  of  climate  of  California  to  prevent  as  great  a  production  of 
wheat  as  ever.      This  does  not  mean  that  certain  areas  in  California 


have  not  declined  in  fertility,  but  it  means  that  they  can  be  made  as 
fertile  as  ever.      It  is  merely  a  matter  of  economics. 

The  methods  of  increasing  the  yield  of  wheat  per  acre  are  known 
and  the  means  are  at  hand.  Will  it  pay,  or  should  it  be  done  even 
if  it  does  not  pay,  are  the  questions  to  be  determined.  Fertilizer 
experiments  have  now  been  conducted  for  more  than  seventy-five  years 
in  England  and  for  about  half  that  period  in  the  United  States.  The 
general  results  of  all  these  investigations  show  that  a  given  soil  with- 
out fertilization  will  under  cultivation  soon  come  to  a  standard  yield 
of  grain,  from  which  it  will  not  vary  greatly  in  one  decade  as  com- 
pared with  another.  Curiously  enough,  this  yield  has  been  found 
for  wheat  to  be,  under  widely  varying  conditions,  about  thirteen 
bushels  per  acre.  Future  investigations  made  under  other  soil  and 
climatic  conditions  may  change  this  figure  to  some  extent. 

It  has  also  been  found  wherever  "long  time"  experiments  have 
been  made  that  it  is  possible  through  the  use  of  either  natural  or  arti- 
ficial manure  to  obtain  a  yield  about  two  and  one-half  times  as  great 
as  where  no  fertilizers  are  employed.  Here  again  future  studies 
under  other  conditions  may  change  this  result  somewhat.  These  two 
figures,  however,  may  be  taken  at  present  as  the  basis  for  a  discussion 
on  the  economic  use  of  fertilizers.  All  investigations  show  that  an 
effective  increase  is  not  generally  made  by  the  occasional  or  periodical 
use  of  fertilizers,  but  is  obtained  when  it  is  used  in  accordance  witli 
some  consistent  and  well-planned  system. 

Investigations  have  demonstrated  that  if  land  is  capable  of  rais- 
ing thirty  to  forty  bushels  of  wheat  per  acre  without  fertilizers,  use 
of  the  latter  will  not  cause  a  material  increase.  If  the  land  is  fertile 
enough  to  produce  a  large  crop  without  fertilizers  their  application 
may  not  increase  the  yield.  They  may,  however,  prevent  a  decline 
in  the  yield  of  subsequent  crops.  Various  experiments  have  not  only 
shown  that  this  actually  happens,  but  that  in  the  long  run  it  pays 
just  as  well  to  prevent  a  decline  in  yield  as  to  increase  the  yield  after 
the  decline  has  taken  place.  This  is  seldom,  if  ever,  done  in  practice 
and  perhaps  is  not  likely  to  be,  since  most  persons  are  more  concerned 
in  immediate  than  in  future  profits. 

Gilmore  and  Lipman  have  discussed  the  technical  side  of  the 
problem  in  recent  circulars  which  are  available  on  application.  It 
will  be  obvious  to  any  candid  mind  that  under  present  conditions 
no  guarantee  can  be  made  as  to  the  net  result  of  any  widely  extended 
programme  of  fertilization  applied  either  to  wheat  or  to  barley.  The 
College  of  Agriculture,  however,  believes  that  there  are  sufficient  data 
available  to  warrant  it  urging  the  farmers  of  California  to  take  certain 
risks.  Considering  the  state  as  a  whole,  it  feels  reasonably  safe  in 
saying  that  by  the  use  of  100  pounds  of  sulphate  of  ammonia,  125 
pounds  of  nitrate  of  soda,  or  the  equivalent  amount  of  nitrogen  in 
some  other  carrier,  an  increase  can  be  made  of  six  bushels  of  wheat 
or  ten  bushels  of  barley  per  acre,  provided  it  is  applied  to  land  adapted 
through  climatic  and  soil  conditions  to  the  crop  in  question. 

Under  any  programme  that  can  be  devised  it  is  probable  that 
one-third  the  farmers  may  find  the  use  of  fertilizer  profitable,  one- 


8 

third  may  break  about  even,  and  one-third  may  suffer  some  financial 
loss,  so  far  as  the  1918  crop  is  concerned.  It  is  possible  that  later 
crops  may  more  than  make  up  the  difference.  Naturally  lands  which 
under  suitable  climatic  and  cultural  conditions  already  give  maximum 
returns  will  not  be  benefited.  Likewise,  lands  which  are  unsuited 
because  of  the  lack  of  rainfall,  or  by  reason  of  physical  or  other  con- 
ditions, for  the  production  of  cereals  can  not  be  made  productive  by 
the  use  of  fertilizers. 

This  matter  has  been  carefully  taken  up  with  our  farm  advisers 
who  are  now,  or  will  soon  be  stationed  in  most  counties  producing 
considerable  areas  of  wheat  or  barley.  Through  them  and  other 
members  of  its  staff  the  college  is  able  to  offer  such  advice  as  it  is 
capable  of  giving  without  charge.  No  one  can  guarantee  what  the 
results  will  be  to  any  given  individual,  but  it  will  be  possible  to 
prevent  many  mistakes.  It  is  much  better  to  ask  advice  before  the 
fertilizer  is  applied  than  after  the  results  have  been  found  to  be 
unsatisfactory.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  1918  crop  of  wheat  can 
be  much  increased  on  a  basis  which,  as  a  whole,  will  be  economic 
although  individual  losses  will  necessarily  occur. 

To  recapitulate  :  California's  share  in  the  billion  bushel  wheat  crop 
can  be  accomplished  either  by  increased  acreage  or  increased  yield  per 
acre  or  both.  Increased  acreage  may  be  brought  about  by  substituting 
wheat  for  barley  or  poor  stands  of  alfalfa,  by  using  areas  recently 
brought  under  irrigation  or  by  plowing  and  seeding  idle  lands.  In- 
creased yields  may  be  obtained  primarily  by  timely  seeding,  good  seed, 
and  judicious  use  of  fertilizers. 

Farmers  of  California,  you  are,  taken  as  a  whole,  fairly  prosperous. 
Part  of  your  prosperity  is  due  to  this  dreadful  crisis.  To  increase 
the  yield  of  all  staple  food  products  is  just  as  important  and  just  as 
patriotic  as  to  subscribe  to  Liberty  Bonds  or  to  aid  the  Red  Cross. 
Why  not  take  the  chance?  The  sooner  this  country  and  her  allies 
have  all  the  commodities  that  it  and  they  need,  the  earlier  this  war 
will  end,  and  the  fewer  of  our  sons  will  be  killed  in  battle.  The  risk 
is  not  too  great  for  you  to  take. 


